G.R. No. 267998 , April 23, 2025.
Eloisa Maliwat-Melad, Petitioner, vs. Amancio Reyes Melad, Respondent.

FACTS

Petitioner Eloisa Maliwat-Melad sought the declaration of nullity of her marriage to private respondent Amancio Reyes Melad. The ponencia upheld the marriage’s validity, finding that the lack of authority of the solemnizing officer was cured by the parties’ good faith belief in his authority under Article 35(2) of the Family Code. The dissenting opinion, however, focused on a separate formal requisite. The evidence, including petitioner’s testimony and that of a witness, Roland Atiburcio Quilana, indicated that during the ceremony, the solemnizing officer joined the couple’s hands, blessed them, and declared them husband and wife. The couple and witnesses signed the contract but were told to leave it on a table. The testimonies did not establish that the contracting parties personally declared, in the presence of the officer and witnesses, that they take each other as husband and wife.

ISSUE

Whether the absence of the contracting parties’ personal declaration that they take each other as husband and wife, as required under Article 6 of the Family Code, renders the marriage void ab initio.

RULING

Yes. The dissenting opinion argues the marriage is void ab initio for lacking an essential formal requisite: a proper marriage ceremony as defined by Article 6 of the Family Code. The law mandates that the parties must personally appear before the solemnizing officer and declare in the presence of at least two witnesses that they take each other as husband and wife. This declaration is the core of the ceremony and must be contained in the marriage certificate. The testimonial evidence failed to prove this specific mutual declaration occurred. Jurisprudence, such as Morigo v. People and Genio v. People, consistently holds that the complete absence of a marriage ceremony where this personal declaration is made results in a void marriage from the beginning. In Morigo, the mere signing of a contract without a ceremony was deemed void. In Genio, witness testimonies successfully rebutted the prima facie evidence of the marriage certificate by showing no ceremony took place. Here, the described acts—joining of hands, a blessing, and an officer’s declaration—do not substitute for the parties’ own mandatory verbal commitment. Since this formal requisite is indispensable for a valid marriage, its absence cannot be considered a mere irregularity under Article 4 but a fatal defect that nullifies the marriage ab initio, irrespective of the officer’s authority or the parties’ good faith.